PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QLC vs. MCHI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QLC vs. MCHI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QLC achieves a 11.39% return, which is significantly higher than MCHI's -6.81% return. Over the past 10 years, QLC has outperformed MCHI with an annualized return of 14.83%, while MCHI has yielded a comparatively lower 4.68% annualized return.


QLC

1D
-0.74%
1M
5.38%
YTD
11.39%
6M
11.88%
1Y
33.09%
3Y*
25.39%
5Y*
15.29%
10Y*
14.83%

MCHI

1D
-2.12%
1M
-2.30%
YTD
-6.81%
6M
-8.43%
1Y
6.44%
3Y*
9.73%
5Y*
-5.67%
10Y*
4.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QLC vs. MCHI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLC
FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund
11.39%23.26%26.71%26.02%-17.21%28.46%13.64%24.51%-8.12%21.73%
MCHI
iShares MSCI China ETF
-6.81%31.04%17.73%-11.94%-23.01%-21.74%27.78%23.72%-19.79%54.67%

Correlation

The correlation between QLC and MCHI is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.39

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2015

0.46

QLC vs. MCHI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QLC
MCHI

Technology

34.8%
9.6%

Financial Services

13.8%
19.1%

Communication Services

13.8%
18.8%

Healthcare

10.1%
5.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
26.4%

Industrials

6.6%
5.0%

Utilities

3.4%
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
3.2%

Real Estate

2.3%
1.5%

Basic Materials

2.2%
5.5%

Energy

2.0%
3.7%

Technology

QLC
34.8%
MCHI
9.6%

Financial Services

QLC
13.8%
MCHI
19.1%

Communication Services

QLC
13.8%
MCHI
18.8%

Healthcare

QLC
10.1%
MCHI
5.4%

Consumer Cyclical

QLC
7.9%
MCHI
26.4%

Industrials

QLC
6.6%
MCHI
5.0%

Utilities

QLC
3.4%
MCHI
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

QLC
3.2%
MCHI
3.2%

Real Estate

QLC
2.3%
MCHI
1.5%

Basic Materials

QLC
2.2%
MCHI
5.5%

Energy

QLC
2.0%
MCHI
3.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

QLC vs. MCHI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

QLC
QLC Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLC Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
QLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLC Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

MCHI
MCHI Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
MCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
MCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

QLC vs. MCHI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) and iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


QLCMCHIDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.69

0.32

+2.37

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.71

0.59

+3.12

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.07

+0.41

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.76

0.38

+3.38

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

17.59

0.78

+16.81

QLC vs. MCHI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the MCHI Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLC and MCHI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QLCMCHIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.69

0.32

+2.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

-0.19

+1.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

0.17

+0.64

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

0.09

+0.71

Drawdowns

QLC vs. MCHI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLC drawdown since its inception was -35.86%, smaller than the maximum MCHI drawdown of -62.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLC and MCHI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QLCMCHIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.86%

-62.95%

+27.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.84%

-17.17%

+8.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.49%

-25.85%

+7.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.81%

-56.98%

+33.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.86%

-62.95%

+27.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-36.45%

+35.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.54%

-24.52%

+19.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.89%

8.30%

-6.41%

Volatility

QLC vs. MCHI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) is 2.94%, while iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI) has a volatility of 7.26%. This indicates that QLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MCHI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QLCMCHIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.94%

7.26%

-4.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.51%

14.51%

-5.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.38%

20.17%

-7.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.82%

30.71%

-13.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.42%

27.39%

-8.97%

QLC vs. MCHI - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLC has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than MCHI's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

QLC vs. MCHI - Dividend Comparison

QLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than MCHI's 2.27% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MCHI
iShares MSCI China ETF
2.27%2.12%2.31%2.66%1.78%1.04%1.04%1.45%1.60%1.56%1.66%2.76%
QLC
FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund
0.88%0.94%1.03%1.26%1.46%0.96%1.40%1.91%1.82%1.29%1.80%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


QLC and MCHI have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCHI has higher volatility (7.26%) compared to QLC (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLC dropped -35.86% vs MCHI's -62.95%.

On 10-year performance, QLC leads with 14.83% vs 4.68% for MCHI. On fees, QLC is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, QLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QLC has performed better with a 14.83% return vs 4.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QLC is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for MCHI.

MCHI has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 0.88% for QLC.

QLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MCHI is China Equities. QLC tracks Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index, while MCHI tracks MSCI China Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for QLC and 0.59% for MCHI.

QLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 0.32), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QLC and MCHI

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer